Sign up NOW to NumbersUSA.com!
Do it, dammit!
They allow you to fax your representatives and senators - for FREE - on issues regarding our country's bi-partison sellout to the forces who want to flood our country with illegal aliens.
Even if your Rep or Senator is a stupid asshole who loves illegal aliens more than American Citizens (and, if you live in California, that's pretty much a given), you need to make your voice heard and tell these pricks that you don't agree with their politically-correct bullshit. Do it for your own soul, if nothing else!
Monday, July 27, 2015
Friday, July 24, 2015
This is SERIOUS... Even the Rabidly Pro-Illegal SFGate is Holding Off
When even the rabidly pro-illegal alien SFGate refrains from publishing Leftist editorials apologizing for SF's murderer-shielding Sanctuary City Policy, you know it's serious!
Instead, they bring in the conservative (by Bay Area standards) Debra Saunders...
July 1 was one of those evenings when you feel blessed to be in San Francisco, especially if you are strolling along Pier 14. But every reader knows what happened next: A bullet struck Kathryn Steinle, 32, as she walked arm in arm with her father. Neither knew what had happened; the shot killed a vibrant woman — for which an illegal immigrant with seven felony convictions and five deportations has been charged. (Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez has pleaded not guilty.) Tuesday, less than a month later, Jim Steinle found himself where he never thought he would be — testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee to advocate for commonsense changes to sanctuary city policies to prevent crimes “at the hands of a person who never should have been on the streets of this country.”
You might think no parent could experience anything more painful, until you hear the testimony of Laura Wilkerson of Texas. In 2010, her youngest son Josh, a senior in high school, was murdered by a 19-year-old undocumented immigrant. Before strangling Wilkerson, Hermilo Moralez beat her son so brutally that his head split in four places. According to the Houston Chronicle, Moralez was a citizen of Belize who had been charged with misdemeanor harassment earlier that year. A jury found Moralez guilty in 2013. (And, sadly, her story is not unique. Illegal aliens murdering Americans is commonplace now, thanks to fucking assholes like San Francisco's Bolshevik Board).
Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, a Republican, is working on legislation to block some federal funding to sanctuary cities that, like San Francisco, do not comply with federal immigration detainers. His bill also would set a minimum sentence of five years for illegal re-entry. Like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has urged San Francisco to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Grassley has a handle on the destructive consequences of sanctuary policies.
Would Grassley’s bill stop another senseless murder? It won’t stop them all. And yet: If Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi had handed Lopez-Sanchez over to ICE, the feds would have deported him and he would not have been in San Francisco on July 1 (not like he cares). To go by his rap sheet, however, Lopez-Sanchez would have been back in the U.S. in short order: He wouldn’t stay in Mexico and he couldn’t stay out of jail. In 1998, Lopez-Sanchez was sentenced to 63 months for illegal re-entry. Within months of his deportation, he had crossed the border. Next: 71 months for illegal re-entry. Three months after his release, he was caught again. Next: 66 months, then a trip to San Francisco, where he was released. Thank you, City Hall. (And thank you President Obama, and Bush, and Clinton, and Bush Sr. for not securing the border in the first place!)
First the pro-undocumented lobby erased any distinction between legal and undocumented immigrants (and are now trying to erase any distinction between violent and non-violent criminals, like we should allow ANY foreign criminals into the US) — with the argument that most people here illegally are otherwise law-abiding residents. OK. Does City Hall think it’s doing these folks a favor by blocking the deportation of habitual criminals who can slip into their neighborhoods and disappear? (So it's a numbers game, basically... I mean, what's a dead white woman to these racist pricks? A bonus, basically. And I will go into this in much more detail in a later post, but SF's Sanctuary City Policy was designed from the very beginning to shield violent criminals - specifically gang members - thanks to so-called "immigrant's rights groups" who were basically to MS-13 and the Nortenos what Sinn Fein is to the IRA).
Wilkerson told the Judiciary Committee, “Sanctuary city policies scream to the criminal element of illegals in this country: ‘Come to our town USA, we’ll protect you from our terrible policemen. We’ll protect you from these tough American laws.’”
San Franciscans like to think that they are sophisticated. Sure, they are so smart they can tell the world: Immigrant felons, here is your sanctuary.
Meanwhile, that septic tank of Bay Area journalism - the SF Examiner - has printed some truly unbelievable editorials apologizing for SF's murderous Sanctuary City Policy and even doubling down on it, but more on that fucking bullshit later.
Instead, they bring in the conservative (by Bay Area standards) Debra Saunders...
July 1 was one of those evenings when you feel blessed to be in San Francisco, especially if you are strolling along Pier 14. But every reader knows what happened next: A bullet struck Kathryn Steinle, 32, as she walked arm in arm with her father. Neither knew what had happened; the shot killed a vibrant woman — for which an illegal immigrant with seven felony convictions and five deportations has been charged. (Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez has pleaded not guilty.) Tuesday, less than a month later, Jim Steinle found himself where he never thought he would be — testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee to advocate for commonsense changes to sanctuary city policies to prevent crimes “at the hands of a person who never should have been on the streets of this country.”
You might think no parent could experience anything more painful, until you hear the testimony of Laura Wilkerson of Texas. In 2010, her youngest son Josh, a senior in high school, was murdered by a 19-year-old undocumented immigrant. Before strangling Wilkerson, Hermilo Moralez beat her son so brutally that his head split in four places. According to the Houston Chronicle, Moralez was a citizen of Belize who had been charged with misdemeanor harassment earlier that year. A jury found Moralez guilty in 2013. (And, sadly, her story is not unique. Illegal aliens murdering Americans is commonplace now, thanks to fucking assholes like San Francisco's Bolshevik Board).
Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, a Republican, is working on legislation to block some federal funding to sanctuary cities that, like San Francisco, do not comply with federal immigration detainers. His bill also would set a minimum sentence of five years for illegal re-entry. Like Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has urged San Francisco to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Grassley has a handle on the destructive consequences of sanctuary policies.
Would Grassley’s bill stop another senseless murder? It won’t stop them all. And yet: If Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi had handed Lopez-Sanchez over to ICE, the feds would have deported him and he would not have been in San Francisco on July 1 (not like he cares). To go by his rap sheet, however, Lopez-Sanchez would have been back in the U.S. in short order: He wouldn’t stay in Mexico and he couldn’t stay out of jail. In 1998, Lopez-Sanchez was sentenced to 63 months for illegal re-entry. Within months of his deportation, he had crossed the border. Next: 71 months for illegal re-entry. Three months after his release, he was caught again. Next: 66 months, then a trip to San Francisco, where he was released. Thank you, City Hall. (And thank you President Obama, and Bush, and Clinton, and Bush Sr. for not securing the border in the first place!)
First the pro-undocumented lobby erased any distinction between legal and undocumented immigrants (and are now trying to erase any distinction between violent and non-violent criminals, like we should allow ANY foreign criminals into the US) — with the argument that most people here illegally are otherwise law-abiding residents. OK. Does City Hall think it’s doing these folks a favor by blocking the deportation of habitual criminals who can slip into their neighborhoods and disappear? (So it's a numbers game, basically... I mean, what's a dead white woman to these racist pricks? A bonus, basically. And I will go into this in much more detail in a later post, but SF's Sanctuary City Policy was designed from the very beginning to shield violent criminals - specifically gang members - thanks to so-called "immigrant's rights groups" who were basically to MS-13 and the Nortenos what Sinn Fein is to the IRA).
Wilkerson told the Judiciary Committee, “Sanctuary city policies scream to the criminal element of illegals in this country: ‘Come to our town USA, we’ll protect you from our terrible policemen. We’ll protect you from these tough American laws.’”
San Franciscans like to think that they are sophisticated. Sure, they are so smart they can tell the world: Immigrant felons, here is your sanctuary.
Meanwhile, that septic tank of Bay Area journalism - the SF Examiner - has printed some truly unbelievable editorials apologizing for SF's murderous Sanctuary City Policy and even doubling down on it, but more on that fucking bullshit later.
Do Something! Go To NumbersUSA!
Do you want to do something about this batshit insanity?
Go to NumbersUSA!
They allow you to fax your Representatives and Senators - for FREE - telling them to stop undermining American workers and enabling illegal alien criminals!
Do it now!
Go to NumbersUSA!
They allow you to fax your Representatives and Senators - for FREE - telling them to stop undermining American workers and enabling illegal alien criminals!
Do it now!
We're On a (Blog) Roll
Marooned in Marin - an awesome common-sense blog from the land of Limousine Liberals - has added us to their blogroll!
Check 'em out!
Check 'em out!
The San Francisco Examiner... the Bay Area's Septic Tank
What a horrible thing it is to see the once great (well, decent anyway) San Francisco Examiner turn into the septic tank of Bay Area news.
What was once a halfway reasonable alternative to the one-party Liberal state has turned into just another '100% Liberal, 100% of the time" pseudo news site. Like the Chronicle, they now field a small cadre of Communist sympathizers writing most of their news (I'm looking at you, Jonah Owen Lamb!), and their opinion page is just a mouthpiece of local Left-wing "non-profits" making a good living sucking off the very generous tit of San Francisco - who can fund non-profits to the tune of half a billion dollars a year, yet somehow can't find $11 million to save the Old Mint - a national landmark.
While the comment sections of the Examiner were always a joke, the paper felt the need to get rid of them completely, demonstrating their commitment to democracy and debate. Since the only people commenting on their stories were people who called them out on their bullshit, they responded like the Fascists they are and just silenced all debate.
And if that weren't enough, they've now introduced their "afterdarksf.com" section.... basically a place where the local "gentleman's clubs" (read: strip clubs but much more expensive) peddle their wares with ads featuring some of the ugliest whores you've ever seen. Go ahead and check it out... I dare you. You'll swear off sex for life.
Just goes to show how hard up this phony news site is. You can't really stand up for neighborhood standards when most of your income comes from places just short of brothels.
What was once a halfway reasonable alternative to the one-party Liberal state has turned into just another '100% Liberal, 100% of the time" pseudo news site. Like the Chronicle, they now field a small cadre of Communist sympathizers writing most of their news (I'm looking at you, Jonah Owen Lamb!), and their opinion page is just a mouthpiece of local Left-wing "non-profits" making a good living sucking off the very generous tit of San Francisco - who can fund non-profits to the tune of half a billion dollars a year, yet somehow can't find $11 million to save the Old Mint - a national landmark.
While the comment sections of the Examiner were always a joke, the paper felt the need to get rid of them completely, demonstrating their commitment to democracy and debate. Since the only people commenting on their stories were people who called them out on their bullshit, they responded like the Fascists they are and just silenced all debate.
And if that weren't enough, they've now introduced their "afterdarksf.com" section.... basically a place where the local "gentleman's clubs" (read: strip clubs but much more expensive) peddle their wares with ads featuring some of the ugliest whores you've ever seen. Go ahead and check it out... I dare you. You'll swear off sex for life.
Just goes to show how hard up this phony news site is. You can't really stand up for neighborhood standards when most of your income comes from places just short of brothels.
Thursday, July 23, 2015
To Dream.... The Impossible Dream...
In an almost unprecedented display of common sense and rationality, District 2 Supervisor Mark Farrell is introducing a "Package of Public Safety Reforms" to try to reign in the abominable insanity of San Francisco's Sanctuary City Policy.
Here's the press release in its entirety...
Supervisor Mark Farrell to Introduce
Package of Public Safety Reforms
Package of Public Safety Reforms
SAN FRANCISCO - At today’s Board of Supervisors meeting, in response to the Sheriff’s July 16, 2015 letter requesting legislative clarification from the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Mark Farrell will introduce a package of public safety reforms, including:
(1) Legislation confirming the Board of Supervisors’ support of the existing Sanctuary City and Due Process Ordinances and calling for the Sheriff to immediately rescind his department-wide gag order banning any communication with federal immigration authorities;
(2) a formal drafting request to the City Attorney’s office for legislation mandating the Sheriff receive confirmation from the District Attorney that the office will prosecute any outstanding warrant prior to transporting a prisoner to San Francisco from another jurisdiction; and
(3) a Letter of Inquiry to the Sheriff inquiring why the Sheriff held Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez in county jail for more than two and half weeks after he should have been released.
“The public safety of San Francisco residents unequivocally comes first,” stated Supervisor Mark Farrell. “Our Sanctuary City law has been a pillar of public safety policy for decades in San Francisco, but unfortunately this Sheriff has implemented additional ideological policies that fly in the face of not only our local laws but federal law as well, and it must come to an end,” said Supervisor Mark Farrell.
Supervisor Mark Farrell’s legislation that he will introduce at the Board of Supervisors meeting today is straightforward. The legislation affirms support for the City’s Sanctuary City and Due Process Ordinances and calls on the Sheriff to immediately rescind his March 13, 2015 memo that ceased all communications with federal immigration authorities.
On March 13, 2015, the Sheriff issued a memo that ordered the Sheriff’s Department to cease all communications with federal immigration officials. On July 13, 2015, The Deputy Sheriffs Association, which represents the rank and file members of the Sheriff’s Department, issued a letter to the Sheriff stating that, “the Department’s refusal to coordinate, much less cooperate, with federal law enforcement agencies recklessly compromises the safety of sworn personnel, citizens, and those who merely come to visit the San Francisco area.” On July 14, 2015, Mayor Lee also issued a letter directly to the Sheriff requesting that he immediately rescind his departmental policy immediately in the interest of public safety.
Additionally, Supervisor Mark Farrell will formally request that the City Attorney continue drafting legislation that would mandate that the Sheriff receive confirmation that the District Attorney would bring charges against an individual before the Sheriff’s Department is allowed to expend City resources transporting any prisoner into San Francisco from another jurisdiction.
“I believe this is a public safety question, not an immigration issue, and it is time we re-framed the discussion,” stated Supervisor Mark Farrell. “Regardless of the specific charges, it makes zero sense to transport an individual in custody outside of our jurisdiction back to San Francisco, only to have the District Attorney immediately dismiss the charges, and the Sheriff release the individual onto our City streets.”
Supervisor Mark Farrell will also formally submit a Letter of Inquiry asking why the Sheriff, seemingly in violation of the 4th Amendment and other federal and local laws, held Sanchez for more than 14-days in jail after the District Attorney dismissed charges on the 20 year-old outstanding warrant. Supervisor Farrell has asked that the Sheriff respond to the Letter of Inquiry in writing by July 28, 2015.
“Donald Trump, Fox News and everyone else who sought to take political advantage of the recent tragedy should be ashamed of their behavior,” said Supervisor Farrell. “Nevertheless, we cannot be afraid to examine our existing laws and policies and look at common-sense reforms.”
Supervisor Farrell’s legislation calling on the Sheriff to immediately rescind his department gag order will be sent to committee and receive a hearing before a full vote at the Board of Supervisors, which is anticipated to be in September. Supervisor Farrell expects to formally submit his legislation creating new requirements for the Sheriff's Department in early September when the Board of Supervisors returns from its August recess.
Yes... you read it right.... a San Francisco Supervisor introducing legislation that is not batshit insane.
Please take a moment and encourage this well-meaning man to continue his impossible mission to bring a modicum of common sense to the criminally insane Board of Supervisors by clicking here and dropping him a note. Thank you!
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Supervisor Mark Farrell the Latest to Attack the Liberal Windwill
News from the SF Examiner and resident Communist sympathizer Jonah Owen Lamb discusses District 2 Supe Mark Farrell's recent brush with sanity. Unfortunately, it will do no good in a town where 99% of the people governing it are certifiably insane....
After weeks of political mud slinging over who’s at fault for the events that led to the shooting death of Kathryn Steinle, a proposal intended to prevent such incidents has emerged in City Hall.
But some critics (read: Communist trash) say the proposal is a betrayal of The City’s sanctuary status for undocumented immigrants and yet another attack on the (rightly) embattled (psuedo-) sheriff.
On Tuesday, Supervisor Mark Farrell made public his three-pronged proposal in reaction to Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi’s recent (cold-blooded and completely insincere) request of Mayor Ed Lee and the Board of Supervisors to clarify how city agencies should deal with federal immigration officials.
“The public safety of San Francisco residents unequivocally comes first,” Farrell wrote in a statement (obviously being new to SF politics). “Our Sanctuary City law has been a pillar of public safety policy for decades in San Francisco (which is complete bullshit but more on that later), but unfortunately this sheriff has implemented additional ideological policies that fly in the face of not only our local laws but federal law as well, and it must come to an end.”
While many San Francisco lawmakers (scum-sucking pussies that they are) have said they are against changing The City’s Due Process for All Ordinance, the proposal requests Mirkarimi to rescind his department’s policy that bars most (more like "all") communication with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Farrell also proposed a resolution supporting The City’s sanctuary status (not like he had a choice) as well as a hearing to give law enforcement more guidance on the subject.
Lastly, Farrell is proposing a law mandating the (illegal alien killer-loving) Sheriff’s Department check with the (illegal alien killer-loving) District Attorney before transporting prisoners on a warrant to ensure the charges won’t be dropped.
The man who allegedly shot and killed Steinle, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, was brought back to San Francisco on a 20-year-old warrant for marijuana possession, but the charges were subsequently dropped and he was released two weeks later.
Lopez-Sanchez has since pleaded not guilty to murder charges and is expected to appear in court Wednesday (where both the DA's office and Public Defender's office will try in tandem to get him the lightest sentence possible).
The package of reforms, as Farrell’s office is calling it, was sent to Mirkarimi in letter form and also includes a request for the sheriff to explain why his department held Lopez-Sanchez for two weeks after he should have been a free man (which he definitely should NOT have been).
The ongoing blame game emerged after the July 1 shooting death of Steinle, whom Lopez-Sanchez allegedly killed after being released from County Jail in April.
ICE officials had asked the Sheriff’s Department to hold him for deportation, but city law bars cooperation with immigration officials unless the person has been convicted of and faces a violent felony (and even then the City still let them go).
While Farrell’s proposals mirror those made by the mayor’s office in recent weeks, at least one lawmaker says it’s one more attempt to blame the whole affair on (the rightly blamed) Mirkarimi.
“[Farrell’s] resolution attempts to affirm the Due Process for All Ordinance while weakening it by allowing the sheriff to use his discretion beyond the intention of Due Process for All,” (scum-sucking pussy scumbag fuckwad) Supervisor John Avalos told the San Francisco Examiner via text message. (Basically, affirming that Due Process for All is intended to shield all illegal immigrants from federal authorities - including gang members, rapists, murderers, and even mass-murderers.)
“Farrell appears to be jumping on the ‘scapegoat the sheriff’ bandwagon,” (murderer-loving faggot) Avalos continued. “Many San Francisco public officials, from the mayor on down, assume the sheriff is so unpopular that they can tell him he should handle ICE requests in a different way than we had required and intended in the Due Process for All Ordinance that we all supported (and is fucking wrong - ethically, morally, and legally).”
Avalos was the primary author of the Due Process for All Ordinance (and is a TURD).
“There’s a national spotlight on San Francisco,” Avalos said, adding the result will weaken the local sanctuary and public safety protection, thereby allowing for a more right-wing vision of national immigration reform to prevail. (God, where do I begin with this? Avalos is a KILLER-LOVING FAGGOT who doesn't give a fuck about public safety. As far as this piece of human garbage is concerned, a white woman dead is a BONUS. In case you haven't figured it out yet, I hate this RACIST BASTARD. Why couldn't it have been you that was shot, you waste of skin???)
Sheriff’s officials say they’re looking forward to Farrell’s proposed hearing to clarify The City’s laws and give guidance over communication between the Sheriff’s Department and ICE (certainly the UNION is - who supported the much less insane Vicki Hennessey over Mirkarimi in the last election).
But the proposal’s other elements are more problematic, said Mark Nico, an attorney for the Sheriff’s Department.
Nico said the existing ban on communication is not complete because the department will tell ICE when someone is in custody (yeah... sure they will), what they are being charged with and other details of the case. But the department will not tell ICE of the release date, as it would essentially circumvent a prisoner’s constitutional rights (which - in San Francisco - is always more important than the rights of the innocent).
As for the proposal to mandate communication with the DA on charging decisions, the Sheriff’s Department already does so on warrants in which the DA has jurisdiction (yeah... sure it does). But bench warrants — used in the Lopez-Sanchez case — and court orders are issued by a judge and are beyond the DA’s jurisdiction, Nico said.
After weeks of political mud slinging over who’s at fault for the events that led to the shooting death of Kathryn Steinle, a proposal intended to prevent such incidents has emerged in City Hall.
But some critics (read: Communist trash) say the proposal is a betrayal of The City’s sanctuary status for undocumented immigrants and yet another attack on the (rightly) embattled (psuedo-) sheriff.
On Tuesday, Supervisor Mark Farrell made public his three-pronged proposal in reaction to Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi’s recent (cold-blooded and completely insincere) request of Mayor Ed Lee and the Board of Supervisors to clarify how city agencies should deal with federal immigration officials.
“The public safety of San Francisco residents unequivocally comes first,” Farrell wrote in a statement (obviously being new to SF politics). “Our Sanctuary City law has been a pillar of public safety policy for decades in San Francisco (which is complete bullshit but more on that later), but unfortunately this sheriff has implemented additional ideological policies that fly in the face of not only our local laws but federal law as well, and it must come to an end.”
While many San Francisco lawmakers (scum-sucking pussies that they are) have said they are against changing The City’s Due Process for All Ordinance, the proposal requests Mirkarimi to rescind his department’s policy that bars most (more like "all") communication with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Farrell also proposed a resolution supporting The City’s sanctuary status (not like he had a choice) as well as a hearing to give law enforcement more guidance on the subject.
Lastly, Farrell is proposing a law mandating the (illegal alien killer-loving) Sheriff’s Department check with the (illegal alien killer-loving) District Attorney before transporting prisoners on a warrant to ensure the charges won’t be dropped.
The man who allegedly shot and killed Steinle, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, was brought back to San Francisco on a 20-year-old warrant for marijuana possession, but the charges were subsequently dropped and he was released two weeks later.
Lopez-Sanchez has since pleaded not guilty to murder charges and is expected to appear in court Wednesday (where both the DA's office and Public Defender's office will try in tandem to get him the lightest sentence possible).
The package of reforms, as Farrell’s office is calling it, was sent to Mirkarimi in letter form and also includes a request for the sheriff to explain why his department held Lopez-Sanchez for two weeks after he should have been a free man (which he definitely should NOT have been).
The ongoing blame game emerged after the July 1 shooting death of Steinle, whom Lopez-Sanchez allegedly killed after being released from County Jail in April.
ICE officials had asked the Sheriff’s Department to hold him for deportation, but city law bars cooperation with immigration officials unless the person has been convicted of and faces a violent felony (and even then the City still let them go).
While Farrell’s proposals mirror those made by the mayor’s office in recent weeks, at least one lawmaker says it’s one more attempt to blame the whole affair on (the rightly blamed) Mirkarimi.
“[Farrell’s] resolution attempts to affirm the Due Process for All Ordinance while weakening it by allowing the sheriff to use his discretion beyond the intention of Due Process for All,” (scum-sucking pussy scumbag fuckwad) Supervisor John Avalos told the San Francisco Examiner via text message. (Basically, affirming that Due Process for All is intended to shield all illegal immigrants from federal authorities - including gang members, rapists, murderers, and even mass-murderers.)
“Farrell appears to be jumping on the ‘scapegoat the sheriff’ bandwagon,” (murderer-loving faggot) Avalos continued. “Many San Francisco public officials, from the mayor on down, assume the sheriff is so unpopular that they can tell him he should handle ICE requests in a different way than we had required and intended in the Due Process for All Ordinance that we all supported (and is fucking wrong - ethically, morally, and legally).”
Avalos was the primary author of the Due Process for All Ordinance (and is a TURD).
“There’s a national spotlight on San Francisco,” Avalos said, adding the result will weaken the local sanctuary and public safety protection, thereby allowing for a more right-wing vision of national immigration reform to prevail. (God, where do I begin with this? Avalos is a KILLER-LOVING FAGGOT who doesn't give a fuck about public safety. As far as this piece of human garbage is concerned, a white woman dead is a BONUS. In case you haven't figured it out yet, I hate this RACIST BASTARD. Why couldn't it have been you that was shot, you waste of skin???)
Sheriff’s officials say they’re looking forward to Farrell’s proposed hearing to clarify The City’s laws and give guidance over communication between the Sheriff’s Department and ICE (certainly the UNION is - who supported the much less insane Vicki Hennessey over Mirkarimi in the last election).
But the proposal’s other elements are more problematic, said Mark Nico, an attorney for the Sheriff’s Department.
Nico said the existing ban on communication is not complete because the department will tell ICE when someone is in custody (yeah... sure they will), what they are being charged with and other details of the case. But the department will not tell ICE of the release date, as it would essentially circumvent a prisoner’s constitutional rights (which - in San Francisco - is always more important than the rights of the innocent).
As for the proposal to mandate communication with the DA on charging decisions, the Sheriff’s Department already does so on warrants in which the DA has jurisdiction (yeah... sure it does). But bench warrants — used in the Lopez-Sanchez case — and court orders are issued by a judge and are beyond the DA’s jurisdiction, Nico said.
Friday, July 17, 2015
Fake News Site Calls Trump Fake News
The Huffington Post - that Left-wing propaganda machine posing as a news site - has decided that they would erase any doubt as to its contempt of reality by announcing that it will no longer "report" stories about Donald Trump in their "political coverage" section (translation: their lying political hit pieces will no longer be found in the "Coronation of Hillary" section).
In a one paragraph denial of reality, Ryan Grim (
After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won't report on Trump's campaign as part of The Huffington Post's political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump's campaign is a sideshow. We won't take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you'll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.
Which is not saying much, as half the stories on HuffPost's main page usually involve The Kardashians or The Bachelorette!
Interestingly enough, some of the HP's readership for some reason didn't agree with the move...
... It's incredibly childish, and is a fine example of why our country is going down the toilet. Let Trump destroy himself! Don't boost him up by acting like a bunch of children. What kind of Editorial Director makes a decision like this? I think Trump is the WORST kind of person, but you can't remove a front-running presidential candidate from political coverage and expect to be taken
seriously.
...L.R. is right. Is this a neutral, unbiased news organization or a propaganda spinning op-ed blog? Any candidate in national politics should be reported without discrimination. Failure to do so makes it no longer a news organization.
... H.M... After reading this whole thread - I have to agree with those who think this is a bad or childish move on the part of HP. They could just not cover him very much like they do most of the 15 or so Republican candidates, but that they ANNOUNCED it, is cheap and childish and seems more designed to get attention than any real political reason. I think it is a cynically obvious move to create buzz for themselves. You say their coverage of Trump "takes away" coverage from more serious candidates. Where is that coverage? So far - HP mostly just makes fun of outrageous or stupid comments by candidates - like Santorum or Cruz and occasionally Rubio. Rand Paul has dropped off the HP page, and just about everybody else but Jeb haven't been mentioned since they announced. There hasn't been much of any discussion of any of the candidates policies. HP's political coverage so far is more like an entertainment page already.
... The same "justification" was used to disregard Bernie Sanders because a lot of the media didn't consider him to be a serious challenge to Hillary. It's not up to HuffPo to decide which candidates we should support. If they are in the running and they are polling in #1 or #2 among likely primary voters, then not covering them as serious Politics is a huge disservice to their readers.
... Trump has 17% of the 15 candidates who are running, which means he's a frontrunner for the GOP nomination at this point. It doesn't matter at this point how many people are paying attention or even how many voters turn out for the GOP primaries. Most of us know he's a joke, but if his campaign isn't properly reported, he may just be joking himself right in to the general election. Ryan Grim and Danny Shea are being lazy, not responsible.
But, for the most part, the Progressives are cheering - as they cheer any attempt to silence anyone who disagrees with them rather than proving them wrong - and are marching in goosestep to the Left-wing pied piper.
In a one paragraph denial of reality, Ryan Grim (
After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won't report on Trump's campaign as part of The Huffington Post's political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump's campaign is a sideshow. We won't take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you'll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.
Which is not saying much, as half the stories on HuffPost's main page usually involve The Kardashians or The Bachelorette!
Interestingly enough, some of the HP's readership for some reason didn't agree with the move...
... It's incredibly childish, and is a fine example of why our country is going down the toilet. Let Trump destroy himself! Don't boost him up by acting like a bunch of children. What kind of Editorial Director makes a decision like this? I think Trump is the WORST kind of person, but you can't remove a front-running presidential candidate from political coverage and expect to be taken
seriously.
...L.R. is right. Is this a neutral, unbiased news organization or a propaganda spinning op-ed blog? Any candidate in national politics should be reported without discrimination. Failure to do so makes it no longer a news organization.
... H.M... After reading this whole thread - I have to agree with those who think this is a bad or childish move on the part of HP. They could just not cover him very much like they do most of the 15 or so Republican candidates, but that they ANNOUNCED it, is cheap and childish and seems more designed to get attention than any real political reason. I think it is a cynically obvious move to create buzz for themselves. You say their coverage of Trump "takes away" coverage from more serious candidates. Where is that coverage? So far - HP mostly just makes fun of outrageous or stupid comments by candidates - like Santorum or Cruz and occasionally Rubio. Rand Paul has dropped off the HP page, and just about everybody else but Jeb haven't been mentioned since they announced. There hasn't been much of any discussion of any of the candidates policies. HP's political coverage so far is more like an entertainment page already.
... The same "justification" was used to disregard Bernie Sanders because a lot of the media didn't consider him to be a serious challenge to Hillary. It's not up to HuffPo to decide which candidates we should support. If they are in the running and they are polling in #1 or #2 among likely primary voters, then not covering them as serious Politics is a huge disservice to their readers.
... Trump has 17% of the 15 candidates who are running, which means he's a frontrunner for the GOP nomination at this point. It doesn't matter at this point how many people are paying attention or even how many voters turn out for the GOP primaries. Most of us know he's a joke, but if his campaign isn't properly reported, he may just be joking himself right in to the general election. Ryan Grim and Danny Shea are being lazy, not responsible.
But, for the most part, the Progressives are cheering - as they cheer any attempt to silence anyone who disagrees with them rather than proving them wrong - and are marching in goosestep to the Left-wing pied piper.
19.2 Times a Day
Embedded in this snippet about Dianne Feinstein's half-condemnation of SF's Sanctuary City policy - and the Bolshevik Board's latest ass-covering session - is an interesting little factoid.
If you think what happened with Kate Steinle is an isolated incident, an aberration... think again.
Between Jan 2014 and June of 2015, California sanctuary Cities denied ICE immigration detainer requests a total of 10,516 TIMES!
By comparison, the entire rest of the country combined had 6,983.
Put another way, that means that California sanctuary cities ignore ICE detainer requests and release possibly dangerous illegal aliens onto the streets an average of 19.2 times...
EVERY
SINGLE
FUCKING
DAY.
No wonder Scott Weiner doesn't want to talk to Fox News. Nobody likes to be exposed as either criminally ignorant or a complete liar.
If you think what happened with Kate Steinle is an isolated incident, an aberration... think again.
Between Jan 2014 and June of 2015, California sanctuary Cities denied ICE immigration detainer requests a total of 10,516 TIMES!
By comparison, the entire rest of the country combined had 6,983.
Put another way, that means that California sanctuary cities ignore ICE detainer requests and release possibly dangerous illegal aliens onto the streets an average of 19.2 times...
EVERY
SINGLE
FUCKING
DAY.
No wonder Scott Weiner doesn't want to talk to Fox News. Nobody likes to be exposed as either criminally ignorant or a complete liar.
Meet the New Bums... Same As the Old Bums...
Debra Saunders' latest in the SFGate is a poignant reminder of what happens in an ideological one-party state, where democracy is just a cruel joke... where the "will of the people" means nothing when the elites hold "the people" in such deep contempt...
When voters don’t like a policy, they can throw the bums out, right? But what do you do when everyone with a chance of winning likes the policy you want to terminate? That’s the challenge facing San Franciscans and Californians who want to change Sanctuary City policies in the wake of the senseless killing of Kate Steinle on July 1.
Mayor Ed Lee signed the 2013 Due Process for All ordinance. Lee maintains that Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi is to blame for the reckless release of seven-time convicted felon Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez (who has pleaded not guilty) not the policy. Lee faces no serious opposition.
The supes passed that measure unanimously. The Chronicle has reported that none of the 11 supervisors has declare a desire to change the policy. As I noted in a recent column, some supes seem angrier at Fox News than the senseless killing of Kate Steinle.
What about giving the Sheriff the boot? It would send a message. But then opponent Vicki Hennessy supports the Sanctuary City law. As The Chronicle reported after a recent debate.
Who is demonizing the immigrant community? Equating Lopez-Sanchez with the immigrant community is a slur in itself.
In the 2016 election, there are not a lot of choices either. Attorney General Kamala Harris is the lead Democrat to replace Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is retiring. Harris blames Republicans for the release of Lopez-Sanchez. She told Carla Mariniucci:
Harris of course has her own history with Sanctuary City policies. But it didn’t hurt her when she ran to become the state’s top law enforcer in 2010. As I wrote at the time.
Harris has a Democratic rival in the Senate primary, Rep. Loretta Sanchez of Orange County told the Associated Press, “I caution against politicizing this tragedy. This is a time to grieve, not a time to manipulate a senseless killing to fit a political agenda.”
The only elected Republican hopeful isn’t exactly holding the AG’s feet to the fire. In a press statement, GOP Assemblyman Rocky Chavez said
Note that Chavez failed to mention Harris’ support of Sanctuary City policies, although he did get in a swipe in at Republicans in Congress.
Former state GOP chairman Tom Del Beccaro, who also is running for Boxer’s seat, told The Associated Press local governments “just can’t thumb their nose at federal law.” He told me, “Immigration is uniquely federal.” Del Beccaro notes that Chavez did not vote on the state’s Sanctuary City law; Chavez took a walk. “On this major issue,” quoth Del Beccaro, “he was nowhere.”
Former GOP chairman Duf Sundheim may jump into the race. I’ll add his take when he is ready to share. 2012 candidate Al Ramirez may get in as well. He tweeted, “I was always clear this is a law and order issue. Time for Latinos to get off the wrong side.” Insiders don’t think a Republican has a shot at the top-two primary — the runoff could be a race between Harris and Sanchez in November — but you never know.
The bottom line is that San Francisco voters who want a change in policy ought to direct pressure at incumbents to change their views on the 2013 ordinance. If they try to throw the bums out, they’ll just get like-minded bums. The options are better for 2016, but not great. Those are the breaks in a one-party state.
When voters don’t like a policy, they can throw the bums out, right? But what do you do when everyone with a chance of winning likes the policy you want to terminate? That’s the challenge facing San Franciscans and Californians who want to change Sanctuary City policies in the wake of the senseless killing of Kate Steinle on July 1.
Mayor Ed Lee signed the 2013 Due Process for All ordinance. Lee maintains that Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi is to blame for the reckless release of seven-time convicted felon Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez (who has pleaded not guilty) not the policy. Lee faces no serious opposition.
The supes passed that measure unanimously. The Chronicle has reported that none of the 11 supervisors has declare a desire to change the policy. As I noted in a recent column, some supes seem angrier at Fox News than the senseless killing of Kate Steinle.
What about giving the Sheriff the boot? It would send a message. But then opponent Vicki Hennessy supports the Sanctuary City law. As The Chronicle reported after a recent debate.
Both candidates said they support the policy, consider the fatal shooting a tragedy and are appalled that it’s being used to demonize the immigrant community.
Who is demonizing the immigrant community? Equating Lopez-Sanchez with the immigrant community is a slur in itself.
In the 2016 election, there are not a lot of choices either. Attorney General Kamala Harris is the lead Democrat to replace Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is retiring. Harris blames Republicans for the release of Lopez-Sanchez. She told Carla Mariniucci:
“What needs to be looked at is..comprehensive immigration reform — that’s the bottom line. Let’s not react to one specific case, when we are looking at a national problem.”
Harris of course has her own history with Sanctuary City policies. But it didn’t hurt her when she ran to become the state’s top law enforcer in 2010. As I wrote at the time.
To start, Harris was in charge when her office aided and abetted in a dangerous misinterpretation of the city’s 1989 sanctuary city law. City officials refused to notify federal immigration officials when police arrested juvenile offenders – or offenders who claimed to be juveniles – on felony charges.
Under her watch (for lack of a better word), the city flew drug offenders to Honduras. When federal authorities stopped this practice in 2008, the city sent eight Hondurans who had been convicted to group homes, from which they escaped.
One Sunday afternoon in June 2008, San Franciscan Tony Bologna, 48, was driving home with his sons, Michael, 20, and Matthew, 16. All three were shot dead. Police charged Edwin Ramos, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who had been arrested for several felonies as a youth but apparently benefited from the city’s liberal sanctuary policy.
Of course, many San Franciscans were appalled. But did Harris then comb through her files to make sure that no similar cases existed? Apparently not. A month after the triple slaying, police arrested an illegal immigrant enrolled in a Harris job-training program for offenders after he snatched a woman’s purse.
Harris has a Democratic rival in the Senate primary, Rep. Loretta Sanchez of Orange County told the Associated Press, “I caution against politicizing this tragedy. This is a time to grieve, not a time to manipulate a senseless killing to fit a political agenda.”
The only elected Republican hopeful isn’t exactly holding the AG’s feet to the fire. In a press statement, GOP Assemblyman Rocky Chavez said
This case isn’t about immigration. It’s about public safety.
The San Francisco Sheriff’s Department didn’t target Juan Sanchez for his immigration-status, and rightly so. But when they had the five-time deported and seven-time convicted felon in custody for violating the law, they ignored the request of a federal agency and failed to protect the public.
Let’s ask ourselves how we’d treat a U.S. citizen who broke the law and was wanted by a federal agency. Would we release the citizen? It looks like we’re giving non-citizens more leniencies when they break the law than our citizens – and that’s a broken system that doesn’t protect the public.
We desperately need immigration reform in this country that respects families but protects the public from repeat offenders. Our law enforcement must follow the law and work together with federal agencies to keep us safe, and this time they failed the public.”
Note that Chavez failed to mention Harris’ support of Sanctuary City policies, although he did get in a swipe in at Republicans in Congress.
Former state GOP chairman Tom Del Beccaro, who also is running for Boxer’s seat, told The Associated Press local governments “just can’t thumb their nose at federal law.” He told me, “Immigration is uniquely federal.” Del Beccaro notes that Chavez did not vote on the state’s Sanctuary City law; Chavez took a walk. “On this major issue,” quoth Del Beccaro, “he was nowhere.”
Former GOP chairman Duf Sundheim may jump into the race. I’ll add his take when he is ready to share. 2012 candidate Al Ramirez may get in as well. He tweeted, “I was always clear this is a law and order issue. Time for Latinos to get off the wrong side.” Insiders don’t think a Republican has a shot at the top-two primary — the runoff could be a race between Harris and Sanchez in November — but you never know.
The bottom line is that San Francisco voters who want a change in policy ought to direct pressure at incumbents to change their views on the 2013 ordinance. If they try to throw the bums out, they’ll just get like-minded bums. The options are better for 2016, but not great. Those are the breaks in a one-party state.
Broke-Ass Stewart Says SF Needs a New Flag - and WE COULDN'T AGREE MORE
Broke-Ass Stewart - a longtime SF fixture and recently so down on his luck that he's writing for the Examiner - has put out the call for a new City flag...
/http://www.sfexaminer.com/its-time-for-a-new-san-francisco-flag/
Here's the old flag... It's not without it's charm...
But arguably it should be updated.
So... Stewie my man.... HOW'S THIS...
In the center of the flag is a man on his knees. He may or may not be homeless, but he certainly looks homeless, in tattered and filthy clothing. He is smiling maniacally, with crazy eyes (possibly achieved by gluing on those plastic googly-eyes). He's holding a 40 oz bottle of malt liquor in his left hand, and a large knife dripping blood in his right. He's wearing a grubby white tank top with the words "I AM YOUR GOD" emblazoned on it.
At the man's knees on either side are two small limousines, where well dressed people are seen shoveling money at his feet. Two women on either side are holding up aborted fetuses as a sort of Aztec human sacrifice - though this would possibly be too much detail - unless it was a very large flag - which would mean it would probably have to be on that pole in the Castro - which the community probably wouldn't like - but, y'know... fuck 'em.
And you've gotta have a ribbon underneath it with some pithy saying in Latin. I don't know the Latin translation is, but my vote is for, "Dicks in Peace, Pussies in War." Or, if you've got some problem against Latin for some reason, you could always go for that typical SF motto, "If It Ain't Broke... BREAK IT."
As for the color, rather than just have a border in gold, you could just make the whole flag yellow, through a mandatory one-week soak in a large bucket of urine.
Oh sure there are other little details you could add... putting Che Guevara's face on the homeless guy, a background motif of alternating dollar signs, peace signs and upside-down pentacles... but you get the main idea.
/http://www.sfexaminer.com/its-time-for-a-new-san-francisco-flag/
Here's the old flag... It's not without it's charm...
But arguably it should be updated.
So... Stewie my man.... HOW'S THIS...
In the center of the flag is a man on his knees. He may or may not be homeless, but he certainly looks homeless, in tattered and filthy clothing. He is smiling maniacally, with crazy eyes (possibly achieved by gluing on those plastic googly-eyes). He's holding a 40 oz bottle of malt liquor in his left hand, and a large knife dripping blood in his right. He's wearing a grubby white tank top with the words "I AM YOUR GOD" emblazoned on it.
At the man's knees on either side are two small limousines, where well dressed people are seen shoveling money at his feet. Two women on either side are holding up aborted fetuses as a sort of Aztec human sacrifice - though this would possibly be too much detail - unless it was a very large flag - which would mean it would probably have to be on that pole in the Castro - which the community probably wouldn't like - but, y'know... fuck 'em.
And you've gotta have a ribbon underneath it with some pithy saying in Latin. I don't know the Latin translation is, but my vote is for, "Dicks in Peace, Pussies in War." Or, if you've got some problem against Latin for some reason, you could always go for that typical SF motto, "If It Ain't Broke... BREAK IT."
As for the color, rather than just have a border in gold, you could just make the whole flag yellow, through a mandatory one-week soak in a large bucket of urine.
Oh sure there are other little details you could add... putting Che Guevara's face on the homeless guy, a background motif of alternating dollar signs, peace signs and upside-down pentacles... but you get the main idea.
Sleazeball Mirmarimi Cries Crocidile Tears, "Asks" for "Clarity" on SF's "Don't Talk To ICE EVER" Policy
You gotta hand it to that fuckwad Mirkarimi, very few people are as good at covering their asses.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-sheriff-calls-for-clarity-regarding-communication-with-feds-on-undocumented-persons/
Here's the thing... Mirkarimi doesn't give a fuck about Kate. Or public safety - at least not where "normal" people are involved. Mirkarimi's job - as a termed-out Leftist Supervisor who lucked out when he got elected to the Sheriff's job in a town where people are too doped up to think things through - is the protection of society's freaks.
Mirkarimi never for a second gave a second thought to the havoc what would be wrought by shielding criminals from ICE. Not even after the Bologna Family murders. And he still doesn't care. The fact that he's suggesting that it go before the Bolshevik Board shows what a pussy he is. The very same "activist groups" - read gang-affiliated neighborhood pressure groups - that got this insane sanctuary city policy put in in the first place will pressure the Board and commit physical violence against anyone who dares to speak up.
The only hope here is that Ed Lee grows a pair of nuts and stands up to the Board. And, at some point, the business leaders of San Francisco are going to have to put some weight into it as well. If they're not too busy counting the profits from cheap, illegal labor.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-sheriff-calls-for-clarity-regarding-communication-with-feds-on-undocumented-persons/
Here's the thing... Mirkarimi doesn't give a fuck about Kate. Or public safety - at least not where "normal" people are involved. Mirkarimi's job - as a termed-out Leftist Supervisor who lucked out when he got elected to the Sheriff's job in a town where people are too doped up to think things through - is the protection of society's freaks.
Mirkarimi never for a second gave a second thought to the havoc what would be wrought by shielding criminals from ICE. Not even after the Bologna Family murders. And he still doesn't care. The fact that he's suggesting that it go before the Bolshevik Board shows what a pussy he is. The very same "activist groups" - read gang-affiliated neighborhood pressure groups - that got this insane sanctuary city policy put in in the first place will pressure the Board and commit physical violence against anyone who dares to speak up.
The only hope here is that Ed Lee grows a pair of nuts and stands up to the Board. And, at some point, the business leaders of San Francisco are going to have to put some weight into it as well. If they're not too busy counting the profits from cheap, illegal labor.
We Are All Kate
Well... here we go again.
Once again, to the surprise of absolutely no one who knows the truth, we are mourning the death of yet another innocent American citizen murdered by an illegal alien who was shielded from deportation by San Francisco's insane Sanctuary City policy.
Once again I have to get on this blog and rant and bitch and moan at a City (and State and Country) that simply doesn't care.
But you motherfuckers are gonna get it. With both barrels.
San Francisco will never change. It is a 7x7 mile cesspool of human garbage that will always vote for the biggest pervert who represents the complete antithesis of American values.
San Francisco will never change. But it can be shamed, isolated, exposed for the anti-American, anti-common sense, anti-justice, anti-human freakshow that it is.
There will be much much much MUCH more about this.
About Kate.
About the illegal alien killer.
About the City that shields him.
About the ultra-left fucktards like Mirkarimi and the rest of the Bolshevik Board.
About the imbecile Scott Weiner, who shows himself to be just another Bolshy with his dismissal of Fox News.
About the neutered Mayor Ed Lee.
About the worst President in American history - who can offer personal condolences anytime some black thug gets his ass rightly shot off but is completely silent when one of his precious illegal aliens blows away an innocent white woman.
About the scum sucking Mass Media showing themselves for the Leftist, Hillary Clinton boot-licking trash that they are.
Oh yes. LOTS MORE TO COME. My guess is from now till the election.
#whitelivesmatter
Once again, to the surprise of absolutely no one who knows the truth, we are mourning the death of yet another innocent American citizen murdered by an illegal alien who was shielded from deportation by San Francisco's insane Sanctuary City policy.
Once again I have to get on this blog and rant and bitch and moan at a City (and State and Country) that simply doesn't care.
But you motherfuckers are gonna get it. With both barrels.
San Francisco will never change. It is a 7x7 mile cesspool of human garbage that will always vote for the biggest pervert who represents the complete antithesis of American values.
San Francisco will never change. But it can be shamed, isolated, exposed for the anti-American, anti-common sense, anti-justice, anti-human freakshow that it is.
There will be much much much MUCH more about this.
About Kate.
About the illegal alien killer.
About the City that shields him.
About the ultra-left fucktards like Mirkarimi and the rest of the Bolshevik Board.
About the imbecile Scott Weiner, who shows himself to be just another Bolshy with his dismissal of Fox News.
About the neutered Mayor Ed Lee.
About the worst President in American history - who can offer personal condolences anytime some black thug gets his ass rightly shot off but is completely silent when one of his precious illegal aliens blows away an innocent white woman.
About the scum sucking Mass Media showing themselves for the Leftist, Hillary Clinton boot-licking trash that they are.
Oh yes. LOTS MORE TO COME. My guess is from now till the election.
#whitelivesmatter
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Fuck You Jeb Bush
The powers that be long for the clash of the House of Bush vs. the House of Clinton (mostly because they want Hillary to win, which she assuredly would).
But Jeb Bush is a piece of shit. A RINO to end all RINOs. This race would simply be who is the better Democrat, which Hillary would win slightly, despite the fact that she would be more under Wall Street's thumb than Bush.
Bush does not stand a chance in fucking hell of beating Hillary. Because he's only slightly less of a Liberal scumbag than she is.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/politics/article/Bush-says-he-takes-Trump-s-immigration-remarks-6366630.php
But Jeb Bush is a piece of shit. A RINO to end all RINOs. This race would simply be who is the better Democrat, which Hillary would win slightly, despite the fact that she would be more under Wall Street's thumb than Bush.
Bush does not stand a chance in fucking hell of beating Hillary. Because he's only slightly less of a Liberal scumbag than she is.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/politics/article/Bush-says-he-takes-Trump-s-immigration-remarks-6366630.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
